Watching an Icicle

A single drop of water falling from an icicle does not signal a thaw. But it is a better sign than a sword of solid ice that winter may not last forever. So was the message that came Tuesday at the end of the first arms-control talks between the United States and the Soviet Union in more than a year.

In joint communiques Secretary of State George P. Shultz and Foreign Minister Andrei A. Gromyko said in Geneva that the two countries will keep talking, the dates and sites of future meetings to be announced within a month.

The optimistic language of the statement dealt with goals and not results. The Geneva talks were “aimed at preventing an arms race in space and terminating it on Earth.” The results, if any, will come only after months and years of saber-dancing among nuclear strategists and technicians who will be advising the negotiators, each grimly determined not to let the other get an edge.

The world will settle for that, for now.

There was obvious compromise on both sides in setting the agenda. Talks will be divided among three teams--one on weapons in space, one on intercontinental missiles, a third on shorter-range missiles. The White House and the Pentagon had said for weeks that President Reagan’s plan to create a shield against nuclear missiles was not a bargaining chip. But one team will tackle that subject. The Soviet Union swore never to talk about shorter-range missiles again as long as American-built Pershing 2 missiles were deployed in Europe. The Pershings are still in place, but one team will tackle shorter-range missiles.

Geneva left the two nations no closer to agreement on the problems themselves, let alone the solutions. Shultz said he told the Soviets that erosion of the 1972 treaty limiting anti-ballistic missiles must be reversed. Both might agree to that statement. But Shultz was obviously talking about a Siberian radar installation that could be used in defense against missiles. The Soviets would be talking about the Strategic Defense Initiative--the President’s “Star Wars” shield.

Details on such mechanics as who will be in charge of negotiations were left for later. There was no discussion of how the three groups might be related to achieve what American strategists want--a balance between controls on offensive and defensive weapons. Nor was there a hint as to how to achieve the result that really counts--terminating the arms race.

All that will come later, as Shultz said, when the negotiators tackle the issues head on. The world will settle for that, for now.